Stef, Very true, #on:do: is not syntax, BUT, it looks that way to the casual observer, which might be the point of the question. If I decide that it really should be #on:DO:, I can make that addition in seconds. {} involves changing the compiler, right? Yes, it can be done, but it requires more than just taking advantage of message passing. James, am I helping at all? Bill ________________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Stéphane Ducasse [stephane.ducasse@inria.fr] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 4:28 PM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] New features ... On Dec 23, 2010, at 10:08 PM, James Ladd wrote:
Hi All,
From what I understand of Smalltalk new language constructs can be added as long as they fit in with the "message passing" scheme/principle.
Since the release of Smalltalk-80 I think some new constructs have been added and I need an example for a piece I am writing.
Can someone tell me what syntactical construct was added since Blue Book - Smalltalk-80 ?
I think "on:do:" was, but Im not sure.
not on:do: this is just exception handling and this does not change the syntax { } did. Stef
Rgs, James.